Hillary Clinton showed Tuesday that a Democrat can win a Minnesota election by prevailing in only nine of 87 counties. That's a path to a statewide victory that I hope DFLers resolve to never tread again.
Minnesota extended its long blue presidential string Tuesday to 15-and-1 since 1960, bucking the Trump tide that swept the rest of the Midwest, save for Illinois. Clinton garnered only a 1.5-percentage-point margin of victory in the state — but that was a nearly 43,000-vote advantage, enough to turn the heads of DFL seekers of statewide office in 2018.
I'm here to urge them: Turn away, quickly.
Replicating Clinton's geographic appeal might suffice to win more elections. But it would be terrible for Minnesota in the long run. It would continue to drive a wedge between the state's urban places (Minneapolis, St. Paul, Duluth and, increasingly, Rochester) and the rest of the state. And that wedge is jamming the gears of state government, to the whole state's detriment.
DFLers should hold true to their party's very name. They should aim to win elections in both metro and Greater Minnesota.
So should Republicans, I'll hasten to add. Last week's election allowed Republicans to boast about suburban pickups in state House races, in Edina, the Arden Hills area and two in Dakota County. To those who boast: Until you're fielding for-real candidates in Minneapolis and St. Paul, you're not really trying to be a statewide party.
Defensive DFLers will huff that their party retained (albeit narrowly) three Greater Minnesota congressional seats in this election. That was no mean feat. They'll also point to the blue blotches that remain in non-metro territory on the new state House map and saying "See — we're still competing outstate!"
To them: By and large, those blotches coincide with college towns, places that are exceptions to the socio-political rules in Greater Minnesota.